Archives

North Carolina Advocates for Justice, a group of some 3500 private and public sector attorneys and other legal professionals, today asked Gov. Pat McCrory to veto H652, a bill which hands over the public discipline of judges to the state Supreme Court — including the discipline of those justices themselves — and allows most proceedings to take place in secret, unless and until the court decides to act on the discipline of a particular judge.

NCAJ now joins the North Carolina Bar Association and numerous newspapers across the state in asking for the veto, and agrees with the objections by Chief Justice Sarah Parker and Court of Appeals Judge John Martin, who heads the Judicial Standards Commission, voiced before the bill passed in the General Assembly.

The members of our organization interact all day, every day, all over North
Carolina, with normal citizens of all walks of life who come into contact with our
judicial system. We see their concerns and perceptions about the “good old boy and
girl” nature of the system, in which judges and lawyers are believed to “take care of
their own.” H652 only serves to feed that widespread perception, while making the
proper review of judicial conduct less efficient and more secretive. Accordingly, we
urge you to veto the bill.

The Guv has hinted that he might try saying “no” to at least a couple of the General Assembly’s worst, last-minute absurdities (and it would be an amazing act of lap-dogginess if he doesn’t). So, if he does act, which ones will it be?

Over the weekend, Steve Ford at the N.C. Council of Churches neatly summarized three bills that seem to be at the top of the Governor’s potential “No” list:

“If Gov. Pat McCrory goes along with the General Assembly’s partial “disassembly” of state environmental rules – and if North Carolina loses significant ground in the battle against pollution, as likely would be the case – he won’t be able to say he wasn’t warned.

Fourteen of the state’s environmental groups have teamed up with a request that McCrory veto House Bill 74 – which they describe as a ’68-page compilation of special interest handouts.’ The so-called Regulatory Reform Act of 2013 was approved by the Republican-controlled Senate and House in the closing hours of the legislative session that concluded on July 26, with environmental advocates strongly objecting….”

Gov. McCrory intimated during his press conference last week that he would consider vetoing legislation passed during the waning days of session that would require drug tests for public assistance applicants. Today, a trio of civil rights groups will provide him with all the ammunition he needs to do just that.

In a letter emailed yesterday and to be hand-delivered today, the ACLU of North Carolina, the Southern Coalition for Social Justice and the North Carolina Justice Center told the Governor that the controversial proposal “wastes State resources and infringes on the constitutional rights of those on public assistance.”

Up until now, it’s mostly been talk. Now, Pat McCrory has to act and North Carolinians will soon learn what kind of new governor they have: A rational moderate who, as he often did as Mayor of Charlotte, puts families above campaign contributions and extremist ideology or a far right tool of the state’s business lobby in the ilk of Wisconsin’s Scott Walker and Florida’s Rick Scott.

It seems like a safe bet that every Governor given the option probably uses it, but there’s something enormously frustrating about Governor Perdue’s penchant for simply taking no action at all on bills sent to her by the General Assembly. This was the approach she took once again this past weekend on a controversial bill opposed by the entire Asheville City Council.

The reasons for the decision to provide option #3 probably appear in the record of the debate surrounding the amendment that gave the Governor the veto back in the 1990’s and I’m willing to be persuaded that they make some kind of sense. But from the perspective of a simple, common sense test, it’s hard tosee what they possibly are.

Legislators have to vote “yes or “no.” Why does the Governor get to vote “present?”

Also, as a practical matter, what in the heck is preventing Perdue from making a “yea” or “nay” decision? After all, she has only four months left to serve. Read More